Permanent functional disability significantly impacts compensation for loss of income, and Courts must prioritize accurate income assessment over mere percentage disability.

JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP JAIN, J.

1. The instant appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for enhancement of compensation has been preferred by the claimant against the impugned judgment and award dated 22.01.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Kaushambi, in MACP No. 4 of 2007 ( Nitin Kumar Tiwari vs. Sunderlal and another ), whereby, for the injuries sustained by the claimant in a road accident, which occurred on 27.10.2006, a compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum has been awarded to the claimant, which has been ordered to be indemnified by the insurer of the offending Vehicle No.UP73-A-1495.

2. Since there is no cross appeal by the owner, driver and the insurer of the offending vehicle as such, the factum of accident and negligence is not disputed by the respondents.

3. In this case, the claimant asserted that he was approximately 26 years of age on the date of the accident, was self-employed, who was giving tuition to children, and was earning Rs. 6,000 per month, and his one side of the body became paralyzed due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he became permanently disabled requiring two persons as attendants to help him. The claimant asserted that he has become 100% disabled.

4. The Tribunal in the absence of any documentary evidence of occupation and income of the claimant assessed his income at only Rs.2,500/- per month, applied a multiplier of 18, deducted one-third amount towards personal expenses, awarded Rs.90,000/- towards treatment expenses and Rs.8,000/- towards pain, suffering, and transportation expenses.

5. Since the claimant submitted permanent disability certificate of 70%, as such, the Tribunal has only awarded compensation on that basis. In all, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, aggrieved against which, the claimant has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company, has submitted that since no documentary proof of occupation and income was submitted by the claimant, as such, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the claimant at Rs.2,500/- per month.

7. Learned counsel submitted that the claimant has also not proved the expenditure incurred on the attendants and the claimant was not 100% disabled, as such, the Tribunal has rightly assessed his permanent disability at 70%.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for both the sides and perused the record of the lower court.

9. Before the Tribunal, the claimant Nitin Kumar Tiwari examined himself as PW-1, who deposed that he sustained serious injuries in his head and leg and remained unconscious for about a week after the accident. He was treated in Virendra Hospital, Allahabad for about a month. He suffered serious injuries in the accident and regained full consciousness after about three months. He was also treated at Swarooprani Hospital, Allahabad, but was later admitted to Virendra Hospital for better treatment by his father. An amount of Rs.3 lacs was spent on his treatment. He further deposed that due to the injuries sustained in the accident, his left side of the body has been paralyzed due to which he has become permanently disabled regarding which, CMO, Kaushambi has issued a certificate of 70% permanent disability. He further deposed that at the time of the acciden